‘R (London College of Finance and Accounting) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2015) EWHC 1688 (Admin) is yet another decision on an attempted judicial review of the suspension and/or revocation of a Tier 4 Sponsor Licence. The power of the Secretary of State (“the SoS”) to issue and regulate Tier 4 Sponsor Licences is one of a range of ancillary and incidental administrative powers vested in the SoS. The regime is effectively run by the ‘UK Visas and Immigration’ (“UKVI”) section within the Home Office and its operation is governed not by the Immigration Act 1971 itself, but within policy guidance documentation (‘Sponsor Guidance’) which is issued and amended on behalf of the SoS with “bewildering frequency” (per Lord Sumption in New London College).’

‘The UK government must give new guidance to public authorities on when government ministers can exercise powers of veto to prevent the disclosure of information under freedom of information (FOI) laws.’Full story

‘Where an application was made by a person for leave to enter the United Kingdom to join a spouse or family member who was a British citizen or refugee already residing there, but the application did not meet the minimum income or evidence of income requirements under the Immigration Rules for an application for leave to enter, compelling circumstances had to be shown to exist to justify the granting by the Secretary of State under her residual discretion of leave to enter outside the Immigration Rules on the grounds that refusal of entry would disproportionately interfere with the applicant’s article 8 Convention right to respect for family life.’

‘Department of Health v. Information Commissioner et al [2015] UKUT 159, 30 March 2015, Charles J read judgment Simon Lewis requested that the Department of Health supply him with copies of the ministerial diary of Andrew Lansley from May 2010 until April 2011, via a Freedom of Information request. Mr Lewis’s interest in all this is not revealed in the judgment, but I dare say included seeing whether the Minister was being lobbied by private companies eager to muscle in on the NHS in this critical period. But such is the nature of FOIA litigation that it does not really look at the motive of the requester – and this case does not tell us what the diary showed. Indeed by the time of this appeal, Lewis was untraceable, and the burden of the argument in favour of disclosure was taken up by the Information Commissioner.’

‘The Supreme Court’s judgment in R (Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21 has received vast amounts of media coverage – more in a single day than everything else about FOI has received in ten years, I reckon. No need to explain what the case was about – the upshot is that Rob Evans gets Prince Charles’ ‘black spider’ letters. Here’s why.’

‘The provisions of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Health Act 2006 were, by necessary implication, binding on the Crown and so applied to all public places and workplaces within its scope for which the Crown was responsible, including state run prisons.’

‘David Cameron and Nick Clegg will set out plans to transfer more powers from Westminster to Wales on Friday, after months of cross-party talks. They include guaranteed minimum funding for the Welsh government and allowing ministers in Wales to raise cash from the money markets for major projects.’

‘Where an application for leave to enter or remain on the grounds of private or family life was made prior to 9 July 2012 but the decision was made on or after 6 September 2012, the Secretary of State was entitled to take into account the provisions of paragraphs 276ADE to 276DH and Appendix FM of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (2012) (HC 194).’

‘Marc Willers QC explores the recent High Court judgment in which it was found that the conduct of Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, constituted indirect discrimination against Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers.’

‘The “safeguarding directions” issued by the Secretary of State for Transport, exercising statutory powers, for phase 1 of the proposed high speed rail network (“HS2”) linking London to Manchester did not fall within the scope of plans and programmes which set the framework for future development consent of projects within the meaning of articles 2(a) and 3(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment.’

‘Last week Justice Secretary Chris Grayling reported on how often closed material proceedings (CMPs) have been sought under the Justice and Security Act 2013 (JSA), as he is required to do annually under the Act. As the first and only official consolidated presentation of how the new CMP regime is being used, this two-page written ministerial statement warrants close attention.’